What's all this talk about consoles... I thought people didn't use the consoles they got with their t5 ships. cough, cough, VATA, cough cough... (I use the VATA in PvP, the -shield resistance can be game changing)
I guess it's all about what you like. I love my atrox. GW, TBR, EPtW3, Elite Scorpions...There's a lot I can do with it. It also has a unique boff layout, one that not even the vesta can emulate. Since LoR, it's way easier to use GW, Tykens, and other science powers because of the arc increase and the buff to turn rate.
I like the C-Store version because well, it let me use it for the past few years before this fleet version or any fleet ship even existed. It let's me try it out on a different character so I'm not committed with using 4 FSMs.
I'm curious about that Hirogen Space Set...with the Nukara secondary set...some R-Tets...and generally building for the "Shields No More!" sort of thing. Need more info from that blog and the other one about the event stuff.
The uses vary. If the definitions mutated the english language would fall apart, or at least no longer be english.
I use the 4th definition. You use the 3rd. Assuming only the third is or can be in use is glossing over something.
I could prove that a JHAS is the worst escort-like ship if I wanted to[...]
Er...it was a simple case of saying that a Cruiser is not an Escort is not a Sci Vessel is not a Carrier is not...etc, etc, etc. Different ships...expectations.[...]
You could, I assumed you'd confine comparison to with a given class as labeled by the game. ... Let me more specific. Ships in the carrier class have gone through a progressive power creep. There was a 2-3% (It spikes if you ignore the extra power) overall increase in base stats from the Atrox to the Recluse for example.
B'rel
Marauder
The pattern is already "broken"...as in it doesn't exist.
There are at least 5 that do follow the pattern in start fleet alone. If you want to count them all go look at the wiki.
I'm going to say that you perhaps aren't as aware of things as you think you are...otherwise, you wouldn't say some of the things you do.
Entirely possible. It's why I make a habit of the "prove it" mentality.
Um, I made my comment there based on multiple reasons [...] How on Earth is it condescending[...]/facepalm[...]
It's the same idea repeated. (the last link doesn't fit the chain though.)
How is it condescending? The answer is in the question. It assumes I ignored instead of contest or (as you are so fond of saying) value the something in the same way. Instead of inquiring or requesting clarification I "must be ignoring them." (Not that I should be nominated for sainthood.)
Limited use consoles...that may or may not be best for a particular build...can easily be ignored.
The point of that was the Atrox is not made of tin foil, but if consoles disappeared today it would still be underpowered.
Which is why that aspect was not mentioned...just the part that was, eh?
As long as we agree on the whole though. Ok.
Yep, 2500 = 2500...but the cost of a Fleet version is no 2500.
You need to get to T3 Spire. You need to have the Ship Provisions. Those are additional costs. It's not free...
Ok, in total to access it, yes, you pay many times what is just paid for the ship in time and effort. However how much (if any) a given buyer pays to that amount is random. It's too random to be part of the control of a experiment or equation, while significant, I ignore it.
No contest, but I can't make a case for other ships. Feel free to make a case for another if you wish.
Avenger, Mogh, Kar'Fi, Ar'Kif, Armitage, Multi-Vector, Defiant, all Romulan C-Store ships besides the Vet ship and Scimitar... Just to name a few.
The version you get from the C-Store is a Trial version usually with a gimmicky and often questionably useful console. The Atrox got it the worst but with all of these their Fleet Version outshines the normal version so much as to make it practically silly to imagine buying the C-Store variant instead of going for the real ship unless you really really want to use it on multiple toons which is an odd thing to do but to each their own.
Of course, the Jem Dread and Advanced Obelisk are Lobi ships - costing 800 Lobi. With an average of 4-5 Lobi per Lockbox, let's go with the high of 5, one is looking at 160 Lockboxes on average to get that 800 Lobi. If the keys were bought while on sale, one could get 10 keys for 956 Zen. On average, you'd have to buy 16 sets of 10...15296 Zen. Hrmm, 15296 Zen vs. 2500 Zen. One might be able to see why one might consider such a ship to be more powerful, eh? Of course though, that gets into the Lobi > Lockbox > Fleet > Zen sort of thing...an ongoing discussion, eh? So basically it's a case of comparing strawberries to kiwis, hrmmm?
Is an opinion.
I am a bit disappointment in you VD. You are good with numbers and the numbers do not lie. The Atrox is at the bottom of the pile as far as carriers go and that can be easily seen.
Even the Mirror Vo'quv (which is essentially free save some EC in most cases) is a superior carrier. It is not a subjective thing it is an objective fact looking over their stats and capabilities.
Let us take a look at what the Recluse has up on the Atrox even taking out the Fighters:
Commander Universal Boff
Five Boffs instead of Four
3,000 More Hull
0.175 Better shield Modifier
0.5 Better Turn Rate
0.03 Better Impulse Modifier
One more Engineering Console
500 Less Crew (I only list this because at present less is better)
That said: No the Atrox is not such a bad ship that it is unusable or incapable of being effective. I have one set up to be extremely effective.
However, that does not negate the fact that it has no special console or feature, it is a C-Store Vessel, and it is the weakest Carrier out there for Lobi or Zen and even largely even for Dilithium or EC.
Take a look at KDF Sci Vessels. There's no free one. You have to pay a premium to have one. Even then, when you pay for one - it is not as good as the free one that the Feds get. Yes, one could say I'm being a hypocrite there. I'm discounting the console while looking at the Shield Mod...
Compare the Varanus to the DSSV. Yep, you get +0.07 Inertia and can slot the Repair Platform. You've got -5 Aux Power and -0.1 Shield Mod though. With the Fleet Versions, that puts you at -0.11 Shield Mod. The rest for the two ships...is the same.
You pay a premium for access to a Sci Vessel.
The Atrox...a Fed Carrier. It's a case of paying a premium for access to a ship the faction normally does not have.
Take a look at the Avenger. Feds have to pay 2500 Zen for access to a Battle Cruiser. KDF can get Battle Cruisers for free. The Mogh "cousin" of the Avenger even has a built-in Cloak, while the Avenger needs a Cloak console from another ship.
Do I think that as a 2500 Zen ship, it should have a little something more? Even if one were to allot part of that cost to a premium along the lines of what we see with the KDF and Sci Vessels, with the remaining cost - should there still be more, imho? I'd say that about the Marauder, the B'rel, and the Atrox. But that would just be my opinion...I'm not going to say that's how it is - not going to speak for anybody else on the matter - not going to be some subjective declaration as if it were fact...when it's just my opinion.
But in its role as a support vessel, where it's supporting its fighters and others - shouldn't any such console reflect that supporting nature...?
Apples to Oranges and the Varanus DOES get a special ability akin to a console and all the previous ships in its line come with consoles including the much beloved Aceton Assimilator(or much hated).
The Varanus is the KDF version of the D'Kyr and they actually HAVE a Fleet Version which the Feds do not. It was always a bit more shaky than the D'Kyr (KDF hate among the Devs you know) but it IS the ultimate support vessel if flown that way so not a bad ship and not outclassed per se unless you throw it at the Vesta which is unfair.
The Avenger? The Avenger is not the same as other Klingon Ships. The equivalent is the Mogh and you know it. Moreover, it DOES comes with a console (even if it sucks) so it further detracts from your own argument to be mentioning it. VD you are really losing it my friend. Yes, the Mogh gets Cloak and the Federation version must get it as a console but honestly that is normal cloak not battle cloak and it is not even that great. This is a common Federation handicap and one of the only ways that the Feds usually get a bit taken by their KDF counterparts. (See Vet Ships)
If I want to take on a KDF Battle Cruiser in a Fed Cruiser I am skipping the Avenger and going with my Tactical Odyssey thanks...
I am a bit disappointment in you VD. You are good with numbers and the numbers do not lie. The Atrox is at the bottom of the pile as far as carriers go and that can be easily seen.
Even the Mirror Vo'quv (which is essentially free save some EC in most cases) is a superior carrier. It is not a subjective thing it is an objective fact looking over their stats and capabilities.
No other Carrier can do what it does - no other Carrier can match the BOFF layout to provide the specific set of abilities that it does. That somebody prefers a different BOFF layout or feels it is superior...is just that...a preference.
Let us take a look at what the Recluse has up on the Atrox even taking out the Fighters:
Commander Universal Boff
Five Boffs instead of Four
3,000 More Hull
0.175 Better shield Modifier
0.5 Better Turn Rate
0.03 Better Impulse Modifier
One more Engineering Console
500 Less Crew (I only list this because at present less is better)
The Recluse is an 800 Lobi ship. Based on the average Lobi per box, buying keys on sale, etc - it's still going to be over seven times the cost of the normal Atrox. Heck, it's over seven times the cost of buying the normal Atrox and a Fleet Atrox using the discount.
Comparing the Recluse to the normal Atrox isn't really a fair comparison. The Fleet Atrox would be closer (albeit still not a fair comparison, given the Lobi > Lockbox > Fleet > 10 console Zen > 9 console Zen > RA ranking that tends to exist in the game)...but it would be a closer comparison.
Recluse vs. Fleet Atrox
Yes, it has the Cmdr Universal - but - it still can't match the Atrox BOFF layout.
Atrox Layout X, X X, X, X X, X, X, X
X, X, X
Closest Recluse Layout X X, X, X X, X, X, X
X, X, X
X
Yes, the Recluse can sport 5x BOFFs instead of 4x. Which means more for a Rom or KDF toon than it does for a Fed because of BOFF racials. Heh, if the Atrox were a Rom Carrier - it would be worse. Trippy, eh?
Still, you've ended up trading the Lt Tac for an En Tac and En Sci...losing out on that Lt Tac ability (no APB, APD - nothing to go with TT if selected, no FAW, etc, etc, etc).
The Recluse actually has 1050 less base Hull than the Fleet Atrox. That's 1365 less Hull just with 99 in SI. Start calculating for other things, work in EHP from resists, etc, etc, etc.
The Recluse does have a 0.055 higher Shield Mod. For a 6k shield, that would be 330 more shield capacity. It's not that much.
It does have that +0.5 Turn. I can't remember if it was frtoaster that had a turn formula out there - ever since the turn changes with LoR, I haven't really given turn much thought. I should try to hunt down that formula though - see what kind of difference that 0.5 would make going from 5.0 to 5.5...the +0.03 Impulse Mod - hrmm, I'm not sure on that one at all; as far as the difference it would make in this case.
The Recluse also sports +5 Engine Power that the Fleet Atrox does not. That would help with the movement angle as well. It sports 5 less Aux Power than the Fleet Atrox though - as well as - 5 less Shield Power. So shift 5 from one to Engines, and the Fleet Atrox will still come out +5 Power.
Both the Recluse and Fleet Atrox sport 2 Tac/4 Eng/4 Sci consoles...
...heh, but yeah - with the borked crew mechanics, the -500 crew of the Recluse is definitely better. (One day Cryptic might address that.)
So pets aside, if I'm a Fed - wanting a carrier with 2x LCdr Sci (including a Cmdr Sci) and either a Lt Tac or 2x Tac abilities...well, the Fleet Atrox is the better carrier in my opinion. If I want Cmdr Eng or Cmdr Tac, well then the Recluse is going to be better...heh, cause the Atrox can't do those. Then again, if I'm looking at Cmdr Tac - odds are I'm going to be looking at the Jem Dread. Then yet again, if I'm looking at Cmdr Eng - odds are I'm going to be looking at the Advanced Obelisk.
When would I pick a Recluse then? Pets not aside...Elite Weavers are EVIL! :P
That said: No the Atrox is not such a bad ship that it is unusable or incapable of being effective. I have one set up to be extremely effective.
However, that does not negate the fact that it has no special console or feature, it is a C-Store Vessel, and it is the weakest Carrier out there for Lobi or Zen and even largely even for Dilithium or EC.
Again, why compare a 9 console Zen ship to a Lobi ship? (Lobi > Lockbox > Fleet > 10 console Zen > 9 console Zen > RA)
Compare it to a Vo'Quv, eh? Compare it to a MU Vo'Quv? It should be better (minus the premium cost of Feds getting a carrier, it should still be better).
-1500 Hull, +0.2 Shield Mod, Stalkers vs. BoPs, then different BOFF/console layouts as you compare it to the Vo'Quv and MU Vo'Quv.
If not for the 2500 Zen price tag...it's more than comparable. So is that tag just a premium?
The KDF pay 2k for a Sci that's actually worse - literally straight up worse...but it does have a console. The Atrox isn't actually worse...but has no console.
So while one can debate the cost of it...that's not the same as debating the stats of it. Course, while the regular Vo'Quv might be free - you'd have to use your selection for it while any toon could fly the Atrox.
It gets muddied...and like I said earlier, imho (and it is just a humble opinion - my opinion doesn't mean any more than anybody else's opinion on the matter)...the Atrox could probably do with a console or allowing the Stalkers to be used elsewhere or something. Or maybe if it was 2k instead of 2.5k? Or maybe if it came with the Stalker fighter for players? Etc, etc, etc...
There you go - give it a console and a 2pc if you've got the Atrox and Stalker consoles, eh?
Apples to Oranges and the Varanus DOES get a special ability akin to a console and all the previous ships in its line come with consoles including the much beloved Aceton Assimilator(or much hated).
The Varanus is the KDF version of the D'Kyr and they actually HAVE a Fleet Version which the Feds do not. It was always a bit more shaky than the D'Kyr (KDF hate among the Devs you know) but it IS the ultimate support vessel if flown that way so not a bad ship and not outclassed per se unless you throw it at the Vesta which is unfair.
The Varanus isn't the KDF D'Kyr. It's the KDF DSSV.
Same Hull, same BOFF layout, same Console layout, same Turn, same Imp Mod...
...+250 Crew (a bad thing, still chuckle at that - meh), -0.1 Shield Mod, -5 Aux, +7 Inertia.
A worse version of the free DSSV with a "shiny" for 2k Zen.
So perhaps the Atrox should have gone that same route...worse than the Vo'Quv with a "shiny" for 2k Zen, eh?
The Avenger? The Avenger is not the same as other Klingon Ships. The equivalent is the Mogh and you know it. Moreover, it DOES comes with a console (even if it sucks) so it further detracts from your own argument to be mentioning it. VD you are really losing it my friend. Yes, the Mogh gets Cloak and the Federation version must get it as a console but honestly that is normal cloak not battle cloak and it is not even that great. This is a common Federation handicap and one of the only ways that the Feds usually get a bit taken by their KDF counterparts. (See Vet Ships)
I'm not sure how it detracts from the point that Feds pay 2500 for a ship without a cloak - while the KDF pay 2500 for a ship with a cloak. It's part of the premium for having a Battle Cruiser - the only one the Feds have. The KDF have numerous Battle Cruisers (albeit, they have no Cruiser - hrmm, wonder if there is one of those in the pipes, eh? What premium will the KDF pay to have four Cruiser Commands?).
Don't get me wrong, I think a Standard Cloak is garbage - has been since LoR and the constant stealth detection buffing/stealth nerfing that's taken place since then...but it's still something that's innate on KDF Battle Cruisers but not there on the Fed version.
Fed Carrier...premium paid for something not available otherwise. Not a case of saying all the premiums are equal - not imo, anyway - Cryptic's all over the place with those things (lol, look at Rom boats, eh? How many of those are basically Fed boats with a Battle Cloak?)
The Varanus isn't the KDF D'Kyr. It's the KDF DSSV.
Yeah, the Olympic is the Fed D'Kyr...oh ...wait...
lol
But yeah, it's a DSSV. At least the fleet version gets a third tac console.
As for the Atrox, it's in the best position it has ever been in. Elite scorpions, better GW, Grav Torpedos, Doffed TBR, Proton proccing science consoles, conservation of energy trait all can make it an exotic damage dealing beast. Most of those powers don't even require a good turn rate to pull off.
If your going to do math with the base stats, VD, don't hand pick details. Start at the beginning and finish. Then draw conclusions! (Also, the shield modifier applies to all four shield facings. (6,000 * 0.055) * 4 = 1320)
There is a reason I didn't compare the fleet Atrox to the Recluse. That's comparing fleet ships to non-fleet ships. That one more detail that a correct experiment allows for. You test one detail at a time, not one vs dozens. More so when you look at the stats on lockbox ships and see the lock box ships already have nearly have a 10% increase in hull and shields and a extra console slot. Let me highlight the pattern:
The recluse has a 7.407% increase in base hull. (43,500 - 40,500) / (40,500/100)
The recluse has a 14.583% increase in it's shield modifier. (1.375 - 1.2) / (1.2/100)
The recluse has a -16.666% decrease in crew. (3,000 - 2,500) / (3,000/100) Believe or not is a good thing, but as that's a matter of balance outside the scope of the math. I'll call it 16.666% loss
The recluse has no change in the number of bridge slots. Again, how much each slot weights is a matter of balance outside the scope of the math.
The recluse has a 11.111% increase in console slots. Again, how much each slot weights is a matter of balance outside the scope of the math. ( (2 + 4 + 4) - (3 + 4 + 2)) / ((3 + 4 + 2) / 100)
The recluse has a 10% increase in turn rate. (5.5 - 5) / (5 /100)
(Can't find a inertia rating for the recluse)
The recluse has a -33.333% decrease in bonus power. ((5 + 5) - (10 + 5) / (15 /100)
Overall stat grain is: 9.774%
The Jem'Hdar Dreadnaught(JHD) has a 11.111% increase in hull. (45,000 - 40,500) / (40,500 / 100)
The JHD has a -4.166% loss in the shield modifier.
The JHD has a 16.666% increase in crew (3,500 - 3,000) / (3,000 / 100)
The JHD has no change in the number of bridge slots.
The JHD has a 11.111% increase in console slots. ( (4 + 4 + 2) - (3 + 4 + 2)) / ((3 + 4 + 2) / 100)
The JHD has a 20.000% increase in turn rate. (6 - 5) / (5 /100)
The JHD has a 13.333% increase in the impulse modifier.
The JHD has a 50% increase in it's inertia rating. (30 - 20) / (20 / 100) (Which I gather is a good thing)
The JHD has a 33.333% increase in bonus power ((10 + 10) - (5 + 10) / ((5 + 10) / 100)
Overall stat gain is: 151.394% (Ops, add the 4.166% loss instead of subtracted.)
The obelisk has a 7.407% increase in hull. (43,500 - 40,500) / (40,500 / 100)
The obelisk has a -16.666% loss in the shield modifier. (1 - 1.2) / (1.2 / 100)
The obelisk has no change in crew. (3,000 - 3,000) / (3,000 / 100)
The obelisk has no change in bridge officer slots.
The obelisk has no change in console slots. ((4 + 3 + 2) - (3 + 4 + 2)) / ((3 + 4 + 2) / 100)
The obelisk has no change in the impulse modifier. (1.5 - 1.5) / (1.5 / 100)
The obelisk has no change in the internal rating. (20 - 20) / (20 / 100)
The obelisk has a 33.333% increase in bonus power ((10 + 10) - (5 + 10) / ((5 + 10) / 100)
Overall stat gain is: 24.074%
Note: ALL of the above not only have their own unique consoles -AND- pets, they have their own unique sets!
For completeness and because I already brought it up, the Akira. (I shouldn't have, it's a carrier hybrid, and not a carrier. It only has one hanger slot.)
The Akira class -20.987% decrease in hull. (32,000 - 40,500) / (40,400 / 100)
The Akria class has a -25% decrease in it's shield modifier. (0.9 - 1.2) / (1.2 / 100)
The Akria class has a -93.333% decreaes in hull. (200 - 3,000) / (3,000 / 100)
The Akria class has no change in bridge slots.
The Akria class has no change in console slots.
The Akria class has a 200% increase in turn rate. (15 - 5) / (5 / 100)
The Akira class has no change in a impulse modifer.
The Akira class has no change in bonus power.
Overall stat gain is: 60.68%
The Akira doesn't have a set of it's own, it does have a console. Ping me on it and I'll write out the math for the Kar'Fi, Vo'Quv or Romulan carrier. Right now I spent too long writing that out. :P
If your going to do math with the base stats, VD, don't hand pick details.
Where did I hand pick details? All stats were covered...including how there could be subjective speculation on the intangibles above and beyond the stats.
There is a reason I didn't compare the fleet Atrox to the Recluse. That's comparing fleet ships to non-fleet ships. That one more detail that a correct experiment allows for. You test one detail at a time, not one vs dozens. More so when you look at the stats on lockbox ships and see the lock box ships already have nearly have a 10% increase in hull and shields and a extra console slot.
You're more than willing to compare a Lobi ship to a non-Lobi, non-Lockbox, non-Fleet ship though...
Um...to be frank, that's playing with numbers - perverting them - to present false information. It's why folks joke about 99% of statistics being made up...
The Tac Ody has a 250% increase in base hull over the TOS Connie...
It has a 15% increase in shield modifier...
It has an 1150% increase in crew...
It has a 66.67% increase in BOFF stations...
It has a 150% increase in console slots...
It has a 166.67% increase in weapons...
It has a 100% increase in device slots...
It has a 47.37% decrease in turn rate...
It has a 25% decrease in impulse modifier...
It has a 55.56% decrease in inertia...
It has a 66.67% increase in subsystem power...
An overall increase of 1837.08% in stats!
...as well as the simple fact that again - you're comparing 2x Lobi and a Fleet ship (not sure why you didn't do the Advanced Obelisk there) to a 9 Console Zen ship.
Why not compare the Excelsior Retro (non-Fleet) to an Apex, Bulwark, and a Fleet Avenger? Compare a Nebula Retro (non-Fleet) to a Palisade, Orb Weaver, and a Fleet Nova? Compare a Defiant Retro (non-Fleet) to a JHAS, Adapted Destroyer, and a FHEC?
Yeah, I know, right? So why compare the Atrox (non-Fleet) to a Recluse, Jem Dread, and an Obelisk?
In the end, the Atrox is no different than any other boat that's almost 2 years old or older...
If your going to do math with the base stats, VD, don't hand pick details. Start at the beginning and finish. Then draw conclusions! (Also, the shield modifier applies to all four shield facings. (6,000 * 0.055) * 4 = 1320)
There is a reason I didn't compare the fleet Atrox to the Recluse. That's comparing fleet ships to non-fleet ships. That one more detail that a correct experiment allows for. You test one detail at a time, not one vs dozens. More so when you look at the stats on lockbox ships and see the lock box ships already have nearly have a 10% increase in hull and shields and a extra console slot.
*snip*
*le sigh*
Ok let me start with this one simple statement:
It is generally accepted that lock box ships are equivalent to fleet ships.
With that out of the way, you just nullified your entire post. Of course the JHDC and Recluse will be better. They are fleet level ships! It's like saying the Bulwark is better than the Sovereign. It's like saying the JHAS is better than the Patrol Escort. You're comparing an old M1 Garand to an FN2000. As for the Obelisk? It's a TANK CLASS CARRIER. The Atrox is a science type carrier. BIG DIFFERENCE.
Redo the math, only this time use the FLEET Atrox (which is what you should have done in the first place). You will notice that the differences suddenly drop significantly.
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
I've flown her steady nearly 2 years. I always come back to her in the end. I could have a Recluse. I could have a JHDC (I chose the Mobius instead during the sale, so I most certainly could be in a JHDC) I could have an Advanced Obelisk (I have the free one, never fly her)
What did I get for my $25 that somebody else might not have to pay?
I got nearly 2 years flying my favorite ship, that's what I got.
Can't whine now because somebody else can get something similar for EC. Hell, I even get a discount on the ship they are going to pay all that EC for myself...
Stalker Fighters on the other hand... They really do suck... And my elites have been absolute junk since they broke them with the new fancy carrier commands... Their cloak is 8 kinds of wonky now...
I once again match my character. Behold the power of PINK!
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
Stalker Fighters on the other hand... They really do suck... And my elites have been absolute junk since they broke them with the new fancy carrier commands... Their cloak is 8 kinds of wonky now...
Definitely not a fan of what the Carrier Commands did to cloaking pets...definitely not a fan of that...meh.
Where did I hand pick details? All stats were covered...including how there could be subjective speculation on the intangibles above and beyond the stats.
Ok, a misinterpretation on my part. My apologies. We're arguing two different facets.
My argument should not be confined to only one ship vs. only one ship. That would be a issue of balance. Something worth arguing, but not my argument. My argument is about a trend was started. My case is depended on that trend being established. Once done I'm asking the trend be upheld or broken, but not left in limbo.
Why would it not apply to all facings? Each facing is still going to have the max it has...as will each other facing.
It should, that was the correction. :P I comment on "For a 6k shield, that would be 330 more shield capacity". 330 is 1/4 the the added capacity. (Another disagreement on details I guess.)
You're more than willing to compare a Lobi ship to a non-Lobi, non-Lockbox, non-Fleet ship though...
Something I hadn't considered. The '(not) lobi' or '(not) lockbox' qualifier is not used by me. I'm lining one ship up against another that just happens to be or not be a lobi or lockbox ship.
I do qualify fleet vs. non-fleet ships because that the trend my case contends is broken.
Edit: Even lining a fleet Atrox up beside a lockbox ship, it still comes out behind.
Um...to be frank, that's playing with numbers - perverting them - to present false information. It's why folks joke about 99% of statistics being made up...[...]Yeah, I know, right? So why compare the Atrox (non-Fleet) to a Recluse, Jem Dread, and an Obelisk?
The add adage about 99% of statistics being made up is about 99% being a outright falsehood, or failure to follow correct methods.
What's false about mapping a increase in stats? I told you exactly what I was doing, and (if I didn't explain it) I did tell you how I got there. I didn't compare a car to a house. I compared the difference of some two ships explicitly labled as being in the same class and rank. (More to the point, sold as being different variations of the same thing.)
I took the difference between the two stats, and told you what % of the original the difference makes up.
As for comparing the Tacical Odessy to something explicitly labeled [edit] Ok, it's not considered out of it's class. [/edit] Out of it's rank. Why would you do that?
1) This would be the second time I told you I confided it to things labeled carriers.
2) This is not the first time I've told I will not compare more then one control variables at once.
I'm not marking a trend between carriers and shuttle craft.
I'm marking a trend between carriers.
In the end, the Atrox is no different than any other boat that's almost 2 years old or older...
Correct. I have a problem with this. I made a post about this. I think you may have read it. :P
Correct. I have a problem with this. I made a post about this. I think you may have read it. :P
The gist of what I'm saying though could be summed up with the following two points:
1) If Cryptic were to release a 2500 Zen Carrier tomorrow, it would be better than the Atrox. This is a definite trend we have seen in regard to multiple ships over the past couple of years. Newer ships at the same price point are better than previous ships at that same price point. Thus, older ships need to be brought up to par.
2) I see a particular pecking order for ships, which doesn't leave room for the comparisons you've made in many cases - because that pecking order exists and thus the ships when compared will follow that pecking order...
That order would be (best to worst):
800 Lobi Ships
Lockbox Ships
5 FSM Fleet Ships
4 FSM Fleet Ships
10 Console Zen Ships/3packs (2500 Zen each/5000 Zen bundle)
10 Console Zen Ships (2500 Zen)
9 Console Zen Ships (2500 Zen)
9 Console Zen Ships (2000 Zen)
RA Free Ships (or 120k Dil)
200k FC non-Fleet Retrofits
So when you're comparing a #7 to a #1, #7 is obviously going to look worse.
Of course, missing from that list would be the "event" ships. We have some that would fit in at #2 and we have some that would fit in at #9. Since they're variable and debatable - I left them out. There's also going to be the standard Obelisk, which was a mission reward but is also a 2 FSM Fleet Ship (Spire).
I think the Atrox should have been a #8 instead of a #7. That's just a personal opinion though - I don't believe any 9 Console ships should cost 2500 Zen. But then again, it may have been a 2000 Zen ship with a 500 Zen premium for allowing the Feds to have a Carrier at the time. Then again, I feel that the 2000 Zen would have been the premium for that...and that - being - that...that's that.
But going back to point #1...well, the Dreadnought, the Guramba, the Atrox...examples of 2500 Zen ships that do not compare (imho) to newer 2500 Zen ships, eh? Avenger, Mogh, etc...not even looking at the (imo) nonsense of the Warbirds.
And thus, an inconsistency exists...
But that's not the same as trying to compare a 2500 Zen 9 Console boat to an 800 Lobi boat...there shouldn't be any comparison there - the 800 Lobi boat's going to be better.
Ok, yes, there is a inequity between ships. (Despite what I was told was said when STO went free to play: "It will never be pay to win.") I'll explicitly agree with that. I've implicitly agreed with it in almost every post.
There is a pattern that if followed through would make things at least more equal.
I thought about it. I discard the idea of giving it a 1:1 copy of it.
1) The turn rate would make something like the stalker fighter's console really hard to use.
2) It might fit the theme, but the stalkers already have that ability. If I'm going to request something new, I wanted it to be something new.
3) I didn't want some random thing that's shiny. The Atrox has some critical weakness and I'd like to get around them.
So far my ideas are to just give the Atrox some control over where or when to fight. As it's turn rate make's where or when to fight wholly it's attacker choice. The turn rate means the Atrox depends on the AI or player being too occupied or sure of them selves to take advantage of it's absolutely certainty to be more maneuverable. (With the sole exception of the Vo'Quv matching it's status as a flying brick.)
Ideally the Atrox would get some monster shields and/or monster hull to go with the theme of being a capital ship, but that's not going to happen.
I understand what you're saying, but I can't really say anything about feeling cheated. In any online game, there will always be changes being made. Stuff will be added and stuff will be deleted. Some items will get and nerf, some will get a buff. Online games are literally always changing. You have to be aware of this before going into them. If you really want to buy something, you have to think about how it could change in the future. That's why I never go for any of the really op'd items, because in a few months, they'll be nerfed to better fit the game. Fortunately, for things like fleet ships, we have some form of compensation. If you bought the c-store version at any time, you only need 1 ship module to get the fleet version, vs needing 4. I'd much rather have things be as they are here, vs how they are at Bigpoint, wher something changes and they still charge everyone full price for everything. I say PWE has a much fairer solution.
Ok, saying I've got my two or so years use out of it (as I keep being told :P) and the game changed isn't a bad argument. Fine , Not my case exactly, but ok. If I don't have to go here again, I'll go there now.
If the value has degraded, why is it still the same price?
That is is still 2,500coins would implicitly argue Cyptic do not agree the value has degraded.
If I can make a case that the value has in fact degraded, then am I really out of my rights to ask for change?
Ok, saying I've got my two or so years use out of it (as I keep being told :P) and the game changed isn't a bad argument. Fine , Not my case exactly, but ok. If I don't have to go here again, I'll go there now.
If the value has degraded, why is it still the same price?
That is is still 2,500coins would implicitly argue Cyptic do not agree the value has degraded.
If I can make a case that the value has in fact degraded, then am I really out of my rights to ask for change?
Power creep is pretty much the thing is MMOs. In answer to your first question, if value has degraded over time, why keep price the same? Easy. Some people would still be willing to pay that much for an inferior ship, for looks etc. However, where it's value has NOT degraded is in what it is. It's a very science heavy FEDERATION carrier. That's where it's value is at.
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
I ask a very specific question for a very specific reason. Doing a end run around the question is going to make this conversation many times harder. I'll restate the question:
[...] It's a very science heavy FEDERATION carrier. That's where it's value is at.
If I can make the case it fails in that duty, or is so out shined by others in their other duties that it's hopelessly eclipsed? Am I out of my rights to request change?
If I can make the case it fails in that duty, or is so out shined by others in their other duties that it's hopelessly eclipsed? Am I out of my rights to request change?
No other ship can do what it does, though. That's kind of the thing.
X, X X, X, X X, X, X, X
X, X, X
Neither the Vo'Quv nor MU Vo'Quv can do that. The Kar'Fi can't do that. Neither the Recluse nor Jem Dread can do that.
Even if you give up a hangar, you're still not going to find it. Give up both hangars for a BoP with all universals, and you can do it - but you've given up both hangars to do it.
That case is dependent on all thing being equal. What I don't agree that are. To tip the scale in the other way just to high-light a point? What if gravity well did 100K DPS every second, had a 360 degree firing arc, and no cool down? That's ludicrous, I know.
The point of that example was that it "being able to do what no other can do" depends on factors outside the ship it's self. That's also why I never made that my OP's case, and I told hasukurobi I can't make that case. I could, it would have been a hopeless sidetrack though. It's worth arguing, but not a point I needed to make my case; So, I try to avoid it.
As for the question you quoted? The if I can successfully make it isn't the question.
If I could (which I think I can, but not the point) prove things broken, can I argue for change?
It's a yes or no question that have a very specific chain of events follow the yes or no. Basically, I'm trying to make a point without being rude about it. :P
It's a yes or no question that have a very specific chain of events follow the yes or no. Basically, I'm trying to make a point without being rude about it. :P
It was a case of trying to say that you couldn't make that point...but that doesn't mean you couldn't still continue on with the overall point. There are folks replying to your thread that agree with your overall point, but they disagree with some of the side points you've tried to make along the way...
No other ship can do what it does, though. That's kind of the thing.
X, X X, X, X X, X, X, X
X, X, X
Neither the Vo'Quv nor MU Vo'Quv can do that. The Kar'Fi can't do that. Neither the Recluse nor Jem Dread can do that.
Even if you give up a hangar, you're still not going to find it. Give up both hangars for a BoP with all universals, and you can do it - but you've given up both hangars to do it.
Even a BoP can't do it. They don't have 2xLtCom slots.
I love my Catbox.
I once again match my character. Behold the power of PINK!
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
I'm being mean over small things. I have a point to the zeal though. If not completely true it is true enough.
If I can argue for change, I need something to argue with.
I could make a case for tachyon beam being underpowered. If I did that though I run into 1,001 different expectations of what tachyon beam does or people are willing to allow it to do to them. I tripped over a argument for retroactively giving the Atrox a console. This case has very little room to directly defeat it.
It can be ignored, agreed with, or denied, but it can't easily be argued with.
I'm holding to that case with a iron grip against all challengers. :P I hold only to that case with a iron grip because of all cases I or anyone else could make, it's the hardest to argue with, water down, or counter argue. Therefor, the best to hold to above all others.
Comments
I guess it's all about what you like. I love my atrox. GW, TBR, EPtW3, Elite Scorpions...There's a lot I can do with it. It also has a unique boff layout, one that not even the vesta can emulate. Since LoR, it's way easier to use GW, Tykens, and other science powers because of the arc increase and the buff to turn rate.
I like the C-Store version because well, it let me use it for the past few years before this fleet version or any fleet ship even existed. It let's me try it out on a different character so I'm not committed with using 4 FSMs.
What it comes down to is: Personal Preference
The uses vary. If the definitions mutated the english language would fall apart, or at least no longer be english.
I use the 4th definition. You use the 3rd. Assuming only the third is or can be in use is glossing over something.
You could, I assumed you'd confine comparison to with a given class as labeled by the game. ... Let me more specific. Ships in the carrier class have gone through a progressive power creep. There was a 2-3% (It spikes if you ignore the extra power) overall increase in base stats from the Atrox to the Recluse for example.
Entirely possible. It's why I make a habit of the "prove it" mentality.
It's the same idea repeated. (the last link doesn't fit the chain though.)
How is it condescending? The answer is in the question. It assumes I ignored instead of contest or (as you are so fond of saying) value the something in the same way. Instead of inquiring or requesting clarification I "must be ignoring them." (Not that I should be nominated for sainthood.)
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/condescending
The point of that was the Atrox is not made of tin foil, but if consoles disappeared today it would still be underpowered.
As long as we agree on the whole though. Ok.
Ok, in total to access it, yes, you pay many times what is just paid for the ship in time and effort. However how much (if any) a given buyer pays to that amount is random. It's too random to be part of the control of a experiment or equation, while significant, I ignore it.
Avenger, Mogh, Kar'Fi, Ar'Kif, Armitage, Multi-Vector, Defiant, all Romulan C-Store ships besides the Vet ship and Scimitar... Just to name a few.
The version you get from the C-Store is a Trial version usually with a gimmicky and often questionably useful console. The Atrox got it the worst but with all of these their Fleet Version outshines the normal version so much as to make it practically silly to imagine buying the C-Store variant instead of going for the real ship unless you really really want to use it on multiple toons which is an odd thing to do but to each their own.
I am a bit disappointment in you VD. You are good with numbers and the numbers do not lie. The Atrox is at the bottom of the pile as far as carriers go and that can be easily seen.
Even the Mirror Vo'quv (which is essentially free save some EC in most cases) is a superior carrier. It is not a subjective thing it is an objective fact looking over their stats and capabilities.
Let us take a look at what the Recluse has up on the Atrox even taking out the Fighters:
That said: No the Atrox is not such a bad ship that it is unusable or incapable of being effective. I have one set up to be extremely effective.
However, that does not negate the fact that it has no special console or feature, it is a C-Store Vessel, and it is the weakest Carrier out there for Lobi or Zen and even largely even for Dilithium or EC.
Apples to Oranges and the Varanus DOES get a special ability akin to a console and all the previous ships in its line come with consoles including the much beloved Aceton Assimilator(or much hated).
The Varanus is the KDF version of the D'Kyr and they actually HAVE a Fleet Version which the Feds do not. It was always a bit more shaky than the D'Kyr (KDF hate among the Devs you know) but it IS the ultimate support vessel if flown that way so not a bad ship and not outclassed per se unless you throw it at the Vesta which is unfair.
The Avenger? The Avenger is not the same as other Klingon Ships. The equivalent is the Mogh and you know it. Moreover, it DOES comes with a console (even if it sucks) so it further detracts from your own argument to be mentioning it. VD you are really losing it my friend. Yes, the Mogh gets Cloak and the Federation version must get it as a console but honestly that is normal cloak not battle cloak and it is not even that great. This is a common Federation handicap and one of the only ways that the Feds usually get a bit taken by their KDF counterparts. (See Vet Ships)
If I want to take on a KDF Battle Cruiser in a Fed Cruiser I am skipping the Avenger and going with my Tactical Odyssey thanks...
No other Carrier can do what it does - no other Carrier can match the BOFF layout to provide the specific set of abilities that it does. That somebody prefers a different BOFF layout or feels it is superior...is just that...a preference.
The Recluse is an 800 Lobi ship. Based on the average Lobi per box, buying keys on sale, etc - it's still going to be over seven times the cost of the normal Atrox. Heck, it's over seven times the cost of buying the normal Atrox and a Fleet Atrox using the discount.
Comparing the Recluse to the normal Atrox isn't really a fair comparison. The Fleet Atrox would be closer (albeit still not a fair comparison, given the Lobi > Lockbox > Fleet > 10 console Zen > 9 console Zen > RA ranking that tends to exist in the game)...but it would be a closer comparison.
Recluse vs. Fleet Atrox
Yes, it has the Cmdr Universal - but - it still can't match the Atrox BOFF layout.
Atrox Layout
X, X
X, X, X
X, X, X, X
X, X, X
Closest Recluse Layout
X
X, X, X
X, X, X, X
X, X, X
X
Yes, the Recluse can sport 5x BOFFs instead of 4x. Which means more for a Rom or KDF toon than it does for a Fed because of BOFF racials. Heh, if the Atrox were a Rom Carrier - it would be worse. Trippy, eh?
Still, you've ended up trading the Lt Tac for an En Tac and En Sci...losing out on that Lt Tac ability (no APB, APD - nothing to go with TT if selected, no FAW, etc, etc, etc).
The Recluse actually has 1050 less base Hull than the Fleet Atrox. That's 1365 less Hull just with 99 in SI. Start calculating for other things, work in EHP from resists, etc, etc, etc.
The Recluse does have a 0.055 higher Shield Mod. For a 6k shield, that would be 330 more shield capacity. It's not that much.
It does have that +0.5 Turn. I can't remember if it was frtoaster that had a turn formula out there - ever since the turn changes with LoR, I haven't really given turn much thought. I should try to hunt down that formula though - see what kind of difference that 0.5 would make going from 5.0 to 5.5...the +0.03 Impulse Mod - hrmm, I'm not sure on that one at all; as far as the difference it would make in this case.
The Recluse also sports +5 Engine Power that the Fleet Atrox does not. That would help with the movement angle as well. It sports 5 less Aux Power than the Fleet Atrox though - as well as - 5 less Shield Power. So shift 5 from one to Engines, and the Fleet Atrox will still come out +5 Power.
Both the Recluse and Fleet Atrox sport 2 Tac/4 Eng/4 Sci consoles...
...heh, but yeah - with the borked crew mechanics, the -500 crew of the Recluse is definitely better. (One day Cryptic might address that.)
So pets aside, if I'm a Fed - wanting a carrier with 2x LCdr Sci (including a Cmdr Sci) and either a Lt Tac or 2x Tac abilities...well, the Fleet Atrox is the better carrier in my opinion. If I want Cmdr Eng or Cmdr Tac, well then the Recluse is going to be better...heh, cause the Atrox can't do those. Then again, if I'm looking at Cmdr Tac - odds are I'm going to be looking at the Jem Dread. Then yet again, if I'm looking at Cmdr Eng - odds are I'm going to be looking at the Advanced Obelisk.
When would I pick a Recluse then? Pets not aside...Elite Weavers are EVIL! :P
Again, why compare a 9 console Zen ship to a Lobi ship? (Lobi > Lockbox > Fleet > 10 console Zen > 9 console Zen > RA)
Compare it to a Vo'Quv, eh? Compare it to a MU Vo'Quv? It should be better (minus the premium cost of Feds getting a carrier, it should still be better).
-1500 Hull, +0.2 Shield Mod, Stalkers vs. BoPs, then different BOFF/console layouts as you compare it to the Vo'Quv and MU Vo'Quv.
If not for the 2500 Zen price tag...it's more than comparable. So is that tag just a premium?
The KDF pay 2k for a Sci that's actually worse - literally straight up worse...but it does have a console. The Atrox isn't actually worse...but has no console.
So while one can debate the cost of it...that's not the same as debating the stats of it. Course, while the regular Vo'Quv might be free - you'd have to use your selection for it while any toon could fly the Atrox.
It gets muddied...and like I said earlier, imho (and it is just a humble opinion - my opinion doesn't mean any more than anybody else's opinion on the matter)...the Atrox could probably do with a console or allowing the Stalkers to be used elsewhere or something. Or maybe if it was 2k instead of 2.5k? Or maybe if it came with the Stalker fighter for players? Etc, etc, etc...
There you go - give it a console and a 2pc if you've got the Atrox and Stalker consoles, eh?
The Varanus isn't the KDF D'Kyr. It's the KDF DSSV.
DSSV: http://sto.gamepedia.com/Deep_Space_Science_Vessel
Varanus: http://sto.gamepedia.com/Varanus_Support_Vessel
Same Hull, same BOFF layout, same Console layout, same Turn, same Imp Mod...
...+250 Crew (a bad thing, still chuckle at that - meh), -0.1 Shield Mod, -5 Aux, +7 Inertia.
A worse version of the free DSSV with a "shiny" for 2k Zen.
So perhaps the Atrox should have gone that same route...worse than the Vo'Quv with a "shiny" for 2k Zen, eh?
I'm not sure how it detracts from the point that Feds pay 2500 for a ship without a cloak - while the KDF pay 2500 for a ship with a cloak. It's part of the premium for having a Battle Cruiser - the only one the Feds have. The KDF have numerous Battle Cruisers (albeit, they have no Cruiser - hrmm, wonder if there is one of those in the pipes, eh? What premium will the KDF pay to have four Cruiser Commands?).
Don't get me wrong, I think a Standard Cloak is garbage - has been since LoR and the constant stealth detection buffing/stealth nerfing that's taken place since then...but it's still something that's innate on KDF Battle Cruisers but not there on the Fed version.
Fed Carrier...premium paid for something not available otherwise. Not a case of saying all the premiums are equal - not imo, anyway - Cryptic's all over the place with those things (lol, look at Rom boats, eh? How many of those are basically Fed boats with a Battle Cloak?)
Really? A Tac Ody?
Yeah, the Olympic is the Fed D'Kyr...oh ...wait...
lol
But yeah, it's a DSSV. At least the fleet version gets a third tac console.
As for the Atrox, it's in the best position it has ever been in. Elite scorpions, better GW, Grav Torpedos, Doffed TBR, Proton proccing science consoles, conservation of energy trait all can make it an exotic damage dealing beast. Most of those powers don't even require a good turn rate to pull off.
There is a reason I didn't compare the fleet Atrox to the Recluse. That's comparing fleet ships to non-fleet ships. That one more detail that a correct experiment allows for. You test one detail at a time, not one vs dozens. More so when you look at the stats on lockbox ships and see the lock box ships already have nearly have a 10% increase in hull and shields and a extra console slot.
Let me highlight the pattern:
Overall stat grain is: 9.774%
Overall stat gain is: 151.394% (Ops, add the 4.166% loss instead of subtracted.)
Overall stat gain is: 24.074%
Note: ALL of the above not only have their own unique consoles -AND- pets, they have their own unique sets!
For completeness and because I already brought it up, the Akira. (I shouldn't have, it's a carrier hybrid, and not a carrier. It only has one hanger slot.)
Overall stat gain is: 60.68%
The Akira doesn't have a set of it's own, it does have a console. Ping me on it and I'll write out the math for the Kar'Fi, Vo'Quv or Romulan carrier. Right now I spent too long writing that out. :P
Where did I hand pick details? All stats were covered...including how there could be subjective speculation on the intangibles above and beyond the stats.
Why would it not apply to all facings? Each facing is still going to have the max it has...as will each other facing.
You're more than willing to compare a Lobi ship to a non-Lobi, non-Lockbox, non-Fleet ship though...
Um...to be frank, that's playing with numbers - perverting them - to present false information. It's why folks joke about 99% of statistics being made up...
The Tac Ody has a 250% increase in base hull over the TOS Connie...
It has a 15% increase in shield modifier...
It has an 1150% increase in crew...
It has a 66.67% increase in BOFF stations...
It has a 150% increase in console slots...
It has a 166.67% increase in weapons...
It has a 100% increase in device slots...
It has a 47.37% decrease in turn rate...
It has a 25% decrease in impulse modifier...
It has a 55.56% decrease in inertia...
It has a 66.67% increase in subsystem power...
An overall increase of 1837.08% in stats!
...as well as the simple fact that again - you're comparing 2x Lobi and a Fleet ship (not sure why you didn't do the Advanced Obelisk there) to a 9 Console Zen ship.
Why not compare the Excelsior Retro (non-Fleet) to an Apex, Bulwark, and a Fleet Avenger? Compare a Nebula Retro (non-Fleet) to a Palisade, Orb Weaver, and a Fleet Nova? Compare a Defiant Retro (non-Fleet) to a JHAS, Adapted Destroyer, and a FHEC?
Yeah, I know, right? So why compare the Atrox (non-Fleet) to a Recluse, Jem Dread, and an Obelisk?
In the end, the Atrox is no different than any other boat that's almost 2 years old or older...
*le sigh*
Ok let me start with this one simple statement:
It is generally accepted that lock box ships are equivalent to fleet ships.
With that out of the way, you just nullified your entire post. Of course the JHDC and Recluse will be better. They are fleet level ships! It's like saying the Bulwark is better than the Sovereign. It's like saying the JHAS is better than the Patrol Escort. You're comparing an old M1 Garand to an FN2000. As for the Obelisk? It's a TANK CLASS CARRIER. The Atrox is a science type carrier. BIG DIFFERENCE.
Redo the math, only this time use the FLEET Atrox (which is what you should have done in the first place). You will notice that the differences suddenly drop significantly.
I've flown her steady nearly 2 years. I always come back to her in the end. I could have a Recluse. I could have a JHDC (I chose the Mobius instead during the sale, so I most certainly could be in a JHDC) I could have an Advanced Obelisk (I have the free one, never fly her)
What did I get for my $25 that somebody else might not have to pay?
I got nearly 2 years flying my favorite ship, that's what I got.
Can't whine now because somebody else can get something similar for EC. Hell, I even get a discount on the ship they are going to pay all that EC for myself...
Stalker Fighters on the other hand... They really do suck... And my elites have been absolute junk since they broke them with the new fancy carrier commands... Their cloak is 8 kinds of wonky now...
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
Definitely not a fan of what the Carrier Commands did to cloaking pets...definitely not a fan of that...meh.
Ok, a misinterpretation on my part. My apologies. We're arguing two different facets.
My argument should not be confined to only one ship vs. only one ship. That would be a issue of balance. Something worth arguing, but not my argument. My argument is about a trend was started. My case is depended on that trend being established. Once done I'm asking the trend be upheld or broken, but not left in limbo.
It should, that was the correction. :P I comment on "For a 6k shield, that would be 330 more shield capacity". 330 is 1/4 the the added capacity. (Another disagreement on details I guess.)
Something I hadn't considered. The '(not) lobi' or '(not) lockbox' qualifier is not used by me. I'm lining one ship up against another that just happens to be or not be a lobi or lockbox ship.
I do qualify fleet vs. non-fleet ships because that the trend my case contends is broken.
Edit: Even lining a fleet Atrox up beside a lockbox ship, it still comes out behind.
The add adage about 99% of statistics being made up is about 99% being a outright falsehood, or failure to follow correct methods.
What's false about mapping a increase in stats? I told you exactly what I was doing, and (if I didn't explain it) I did tell you how I got there. I didn't compare a car to a house. I compared the difference of some two ships explicitly labled as being in the same class and rank. (More to the point, sold as being different variations of the same thing.)
I took the difference between the two stats, and told you what % of the original the difference makes up.
As for comparing the Tacical Odessy to something explicitly labeled [edit] Ok, it's not considered out of it's class. [/edit] Out of it's rank. Why would you do that?
1) This would be the second time I told you I confided it to things labeled carriers.
2) This is not the first time I've told I will not compare more then one control variables at once.
I'm not marking a trend between carriers and shuttle craft.
I'm marking a trend between carriers.
Correct. I have a problem with this. I made a post about this. I think you may have read it. :P
Forgoing it still cost's $25 two years later?
That I'm complaining that I somehow didn't get years of enjoyment from my Atrox, could be read from what I posted. Not what I'm posting about.
Consider the following logic. Before you condemn me.
You like the ship. It could then be said you want more for the ship?
Assuming that's true, I would think you seek a way to get a console for the ship.
There is a pattern that to C-Store and Fleet ships. Agreeing with the pattern isn't the point. The point is there is a pattern.
Unlike a most of the remaining C-Store ship, the Atrox does not follow this pattern.
If it did, the Atrox would have a console. As already assumed, you want a console.
I made a post arguing for the Atrox to follow this pattern, therefore get a console.
Do we still have a problem?
Edit: Sweet mercy! I'm trying to improve the game and being told I can't do that, or I'm a horrible person. :P
The gist of what I'm saying though could be summed up with the following two points:
1) If Cryptic were to release a 2500 Zen Carrier tomorrow, it would be better than the Atrox. This is a definite trend we have seen in regard to multiple ships over the past couple of years. Newer ships at the same price point are better than previous ships at that same price point. Thus, older ships need to be brought up to par.
2) I see a particular pecking order for ships, which doesn't leave room for the comparisons you've made in many cases - because that pecking order exists and thus the ships when compared will follow that pecking order...
That order would be (best to worst):
So when you're comparing a #7 to a #1, #7 is obviously going to look worse.
Of course, missing from that list would be the "event" ships. We have some that would fit in at #2 and we have some that would fit in at #9. Since they're variable and debatable - I left them out. There's also going to be the standard Obelisk, which was a mission reward but is also a 2 FSM Fleet Ship (Spire).
I think the Atrox should have been a #8 instead of a #7. That's just a personal opinion though - I don't believe any 9 Console ships should cost 2500 Zen. But then again, it may have been a 2000 Zen ship with a 500 Zen premium for allowing the Feds to have a Carrier at the time. Then again, I feel that the 2000 Zen would have been the premium for that...and that - being - that...that's that.
But going back to point #1...well, the Dreadnought, the Guramba, the Atrox...examples of 2500 Zen ships that do not compare (imho) to newer 2500 Zen ships, eh? Avenger, Mogh, etc...not even looking at the (imo) nonsense of the Warbirds.
And thus, an inconsistency exists...
But that's not the same as trying to compare a 2500 Zen 9 Console boat to an 800 Lobi boat...there shouldn't be any comparison there - the 800 Lobi boat's going to be better.
There is a pattern that if followed through would make things at least more equal.
I argue for this pattern to be upheld. :P
1) The turn rate would make something like the stalker fighter's console really hard to use.
2) It might fit the theme, but the stalkers already have that ability. If I'm going to request something new, I wanted it to be something new.
3) I didn't want some random thing that's shiny. The Atrox has some critical weakness and I'd like to get around them.
So far my ideas are to just give the Atrox some control over where or when to fight. As it's turn rate make's where or when to fight wholly it's attacker choice. The turn rate means the Atrox depends on the AI or player being too occupied or sure of them selves to take advantage of it's absolutely certainty to be more maneuverable. (With the sole exception of the Vo'Quv matching it's status as a flying brick.)
Ideally the Atrox would get some monster shields and/or monster hull to go with the theme of being a capital ship, but that's not going to happen.
"The Darned Good Reason rule. As in 'nobody becomes a adventure without a darn good reason to think they'll survive it."
The Atrox fails the DGR rule.
*Goblin Hollow, page 67
If the value has degraded, why is it still the same price?
That is is still 2,500coins would implicitly argue Cyptic do not agree the value has degraded.
If I can make a case that the value has in fact degraded, then am I really out of my rights to ask for change?
Power creep is pretty much the thing is MMOs. In answer to your first question, if value has degraded over time, why keep price the same? Easy. Some people would still be willing to pay that much for an inferior ship, for looks etc. However, where it's value has NOT degraded is in what it is. It's a very science heavy FEDERATION carrier. That's where it's value is at.
Hell, I could have made $25 in the time it took me to read this thread...
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
If I can make the case it fails in that duty, or is so out shined by others in their other duties that it's hopelessly eclipsed? Am I out of my rights to request change?
That's not a solution of any kind, that's a full scale retreat and ignoring the problem. Still not the question though.
If I can make a case it's no longer worth $25, am I out of my rights to request change?
No other ship can do what it does, though. That's kind of the thing.
X, X
X, X, X
X, X, X, X
X, X, X
Neither the Vo'Quv nor MU Vo'Quv can do that. The Kar'Fi can't do that. Neither the Recluse nor Jem Dread can do that.
Even if you give up a hangar, you're still not going to find it. Give up both hangars for a BoP with all universals, and you can do it - but you've given up both hangars to do it.
The point of that example was that it "being able to do what no other can do" depends on factors outside the ship it's self. That's also why I never made that my OP's case, and I told hasukurobi I can't make that case. I could, it would have been a hopeless sidetrack though. It's worth arguing, but not a point I needed to make my case; So, I try to avoid it.
As for the question you quoted? The if I can successfully make it isn't the question.
If I could (which I think I can, but not the point) prove things broken, can I argue for change?
It's a yes or no question that have a very specific chain of events follow the yes or no. Basically, I'm trying to make a point without being rude about it. :P
It was a case of trying to say that you couldn't make that point...but that doesn't mean you couldn't still continue on with the overall point. There are folks replying to your thread that agree with your overall point, but they disagree with some of the side points you've tried to make along the way...
Even a BoP can't do it. They don't have 2xLtCom slots.
I love my Catbox.
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
Fleet Norgh can do the BOFF layout...but it's not comparable for so many other reasons.
Edit: Did they buff it? I looked it up I thought it had way less hull than that.
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
If I can argue for change, I need something to argue with.
I could make a case for tachyon beam being underpowered. If I did that though I run into 1,001 different expectations of what tachyon beam does or people are willing to allow it to do to them. I tripped over a argument for retroactively giving the Atrox a console. This case has very little room to directly defeat it.
It can be ignored, agreed with, or denied, but it can't easily be argued with.
I'm holding to that case with a iron grip against all challengers. :P I hold only to that case with a iron grip because of all cases I or anyone else could make, it's the hardest to argue with, water down, or counter argue. Therefor, the best to hold to above all others.
My apologies to others, but I'm going to keep being a zealot on that point until that that case succeeds or is defeated.